yes you're right.
Rosetta will only save after every completed model. With these large models, you have to complete them in one go or start over from the beginning when you unload the project (switch to another project for a little time, reboot your computer, you get the idea).

Thanks for the quick replys!

So do I need to have my switch time > time for the entire WU to complete?
Isn't there any checkpointing?

-Sid

This is ridiculous. A simple home-cruncher, leaving his/her PC on for only a few hours per day, could get stuck on one of those WUs indefinitely!

(Nairb - what are the math specs on that system that took 9 Hours?)

This is ridiculous. A simple home-cruncher, leaving his/her PC on for only a few hours per day, could get stuck on one of those WUs indefinitely!

It does sound like a rather stringent requirement.

Is this going to be the norm. from here on out?

This is ridiculous. A simple home-cruncher, leaving his/her PC on for only a few hours per day, could get stuck on one of those WUs indefinitely!

It does sound like a rather stringent requirement.

Is this going to be the norm. from here on out?

The plan is to try to have it checkpoint more often, or at least try to dump everything to a memory image at program swaps. But there is a lot of data involved, and interrupting the model effects the model outcome adversely.

This is ridiculous. A simple home-cruncher, leaving his/her PC on for only a few hours per day, could get stuck on one of those WUs indefinitely!

It does sound like a rather stringent requirement.

Is this going to be the norm. from here on out?

The plan is to try to have it checkpoint more often, or at least try to dump everything to a memory image at program swaps. But there is a lot of data involved, and interrupting the model effects the model outcome adversely.

I'm in a fortunate position that I can flex to requirements that impact how my PCs are operated, but I am concerned that the majority of your participants just simply cannot assure a computer will not be re-booted or available to crunch nothing but Rosetta 24/7/365.

I understand the prospective of the project developers, but I think the project simply MUST acknowledge that the vast majority of it's participants consider DC to be a side endeavor. If your project impacts the use the PC was really bought to serve...your membership will suffer.

A thread asking for suggestions to increase project participation was posted some time ago.

I believe the single, most important answer is... your project must be hands-off with utter transparency to the work the PC was procured to do in the first place.

I think I speak for many when I say I like Rosetta and the work it hopes to accomplish, but it is incorrect to expect PC users to arrange their PC to crunch your project.... it must be the other way around. Rosetta must arrange itself to fit within the resources that are available.

Respectfully,
-Sid

I totally agree with you Sid. It is not acceptable to have a job running for hours without a checkpoint. We realized that this is a mistake and have had those largescale jobs canceled from the boinc server. If your computer still has the largescale jobs running or queued please abort them - the new short jobs are waiting to be sent!

In the future we will be extremely cautious to not let this happen again - we are coding and testing some solutions to make the program checkpoint more often. It is of our highest priority at this moment to make sure that ever minute of your precious computer-on time spent on the Rosetta@home project can contribute to the scientific goals we are trying to achieve together.

I should add that for users who crunch Rosetta 24/7 or have "leave in memory" on, you can choose to let the largescale jobs currently in your computers keep running. These results are still of great interest to us!

I totally agree with you Sid. It is not acceptable to have a job running for hours without a checkpoint. We realized that this is a mistake and have had those largescale jobs canceled from the boinc server. If your computer still has the largescale jobs running or queued please abort them - the new short jobs are waiting to be sent!

In the future we will be extremely cautious to not let this happen again - we are coding and testing some solutions to make the program checkpoint more often. It is of our highest priority at this moment to make sure that ever minute of your precious computer-on time spent on the Rosetta@home project can contribute to the scientific goals we are trying to achieve together.

I should add that for users who crunch Rosetta 24/7 or have "leave in memory" on, you can choose to let the largescale jobs currently in your computers keep running. These results are still of great interest to us!

Thanks Bin!

Knowing the project IS sensitive to this kind of concern and IS making an effort to shape this project in a productive way, is plenty to keep me supporting such an interesting and valuable research endeavor!

-Sid

I totally agree with you Sid. It is not acceptable to have a job running for hours without a checkpoint. We realized that this is a mistake and have had those largescale jobs canceled from the boinc server. If your computer still has the largescale jobs running or queued please abort them - the new short jobs are waiting to be sent!

In the future we will be extremely cautious to not let this happen again - we are coding and testing some solutions to make the program checkpoint more often. It is of our highest priority at this moment to make sure that ever minute of your precious computer-on time spent on the Rosetta@home project can contribute to the scientific goals we are trying to achieve together.

I should add that for users who crunch Rosetta 24/7 or have "leave in memory" on, you can choose to let the largescale jobs currently in your computers keep running. These results are still of great interest to us!

Thanks Bin!

Knowing the project IS sensitive to this kind of concern and IS making an effort to shape this project in a productive way, is plenty to keep me supporting such an interesting and valuable research endeavor!

-Sid

I get the impression from your response that you have misinterpreted the information I tried to provide, to imply that I had in some way said the project does not think this is important. Nothing could be further from the truth. The original question was why did the Work Unit run so long without a checkpoint (see thread title). I never said this was an issue the project was ignoring, or not trying to fix. I just tried to explain WHY it was working the way it was.

This is ridiculous. A simple home-cruncher, leaving his/her PC on for only a few hours per day, could get stuck on one of those WUs indefinitely!

It does sound like a rather stringent requirement.

Is this going to be the norm. from here on out?

The plan is to try to have it checkpoint more often, or at least try to dump everything to a memory image at program swaps. But there is a lot of data involved, and interrupting the model effects the model outcome adversely.

... maybe you could start a new "RosettaExtreme" project just for those of us who would be happy to take care of those big proteins for you. Big WU's only.

Bill

[b]"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me[/b]